Can punishment be justified on utilitarian grounds?

Can punishment be justified on utilitarian grounds?

Introduction

One of the central, and revealing, elements of every political system is how it punishes those who break the law. Many different variables provide insight into the working of a regime, including how systems of punishment are administered; which infractions are considered worthy of punishment; what sorts of punishments are demanded; whether punishment is conceived as serving justice, social order, or the combination thereof; and whether those accused of crimes are able to offer a defence. It is important to distinguish the ideas about punishment espoused by a regime from its actual practices, as both are relevant for understanding how punishment and political order are interrelated. Four lenses of analyses have predominated in the political theory of punishment: punishment and right, punishment in relationship to sovereignty, a sociological approach that focuses on how different groups in society are affected by punishment practices, and utilitarian and economic approaches that investigate the role of punishment as a political tool that complements larger social or economic systems (Valier, 2002).

In this paper, the author will examine the justification of punishment on utilitarian grounds

Discussion & Analysis

The integral relationship of punishment to the concepts of rights in Western political thought can be traced back to the common Greek roots of timê and poinê: the words honour and punish have a common origin. It is an acknowledgment of human rationality and judgment that creates the need to punish. Today, those who are considered impaired in their judgment, for instance by youth or mental instability, are not held accountable for their actions the same way as those in full control of their faculties. Intentionality in agency is also important; a crime is punished differently depending on whether it is determined to have been premeditated or accidental. Therefore, the liberal tradition in political theory sees punishment as a necessary complement to individual rights. The belief in judgment that grounds individual rights also means that all individuals must be held accountable for the results of their actions. Although we may think of punishment as a way of limiting individual freedom, many thinkers have argued it is actually recognition of individual freedom and responsibility (Tonry, 2004).

Punishment is also integral to the dictates of sovereignty to deliver order, security, and justice. Social contract theory emphasizes the exclusive right to punish that resides with political authorities once a political order has been established. For Thomas Hobbes, the sovereign punishes in order to create security and justice and to train the subjects of the social contract; whereas for John Locke, the role of the state is to provide impartial adjudication of conflict. Locke argues that impartial judicial procedures and punishments are the best way for the state to limit the eruption of irrationality and anger—the state of war—into the context of a political society. Governments must use punishment in such a way that it promotes the end of political society as a whole: to enlarge the security and stability of individuals, and not ...